ENFORCE31553

• Permit No: C1994082
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 10/3/2001
• Doc Name: NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMOUNT OF CIVIL PENALTY REQUEST FOR CONFERENCE
• Violation No.: CV2001009
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Proposed Civil Penalty Assessment
Seneca Coal Company/The Yoast Mine
NOV CV-01.009
Materials reviewed in conjunction with the prepazation of this proposed assessment were: DMG inspection
report of 8/28-29/01; DMG NOV CV-2001-009 form; copies of Permittee's "Blasting Record" forms;
Permittee's seismograph, with note, received 9/13/01; NOV Termination Notice dated 9/25/01.
History [Rule 5.04.5(3)(a)]:
No NOVs have been issued at this mine within the year preceding the issue date of this NOV.
The History component of this assessment is therefore proposed at $0.
Seriousness [Rule 5.04.5(3)(6)]:
The Seriousness component of a proposed assessment may [ange from $0 to $1750. The amount
assessed is based upon whether the permittee failed to comply with a performance standard or an
administrative standard. This NOV was written for a violation of a performance standard.
In the case of a permittee's failure to comply with a performance standard, the Seriousness
component is to be further based upon two additional factors: (1) the probability of the occurrence
of the event which the violated standard is designed to prevent, and (2) the duration and extent of
the actual or potential damage in terms of area and impact upon the public and the environment.
(1) Rule 4.08.4(10)(c) attempts [o protect buildings from damage that could result from ground
vibrations due to blasting. As the Permittee's 7/24/01 "Blasting Record" indicates that the
permiltee used a higher amount of explosives per 8 ms period than allowed by this rule, the
probability that the "G. Valora" structure may have been damaged appears to exist.
(2) As [his NOV was written for one non-compliant blast, the duration of this violation appears to
have lasted less than five minutes. It is furher not known whe[he~r the "G. Valora" sVUCture
was actually damaged. However, as the 7/24/01 blast used approximately 33% more
explosives per 8 ms period than allowed by State regulations, it can be reasonably assumed
that some potential for damage to the "G. Valora" structure occurred as a result of the blast.
The Seriousness component of this proposed penalty assessment is therefore set at $1000.
Fault [Rule 5.04.5(3)(c)]:
The fault component of a proposed assessment may range from $0 to $1500. Assessments for
unavoidable violations may range from $0 to $250. Assessments for violations that were [he
result of negligence may range from $250 to $750. Assessments for violations that were the result
of intentional conduct may range from $750 to $ ] 500.
'this violation appears to have occurted as a result of an extremely high degree of negligence. It is
the permittee's responsibility to ensure that explosives are used in accordance with the regulations.
The Fault component of this proposed penalty assessment is therefore set al $750.
Good Faith Credit in Achieving Compliance [Rule 5.04.5(3)(d)]:
I[ appears that [his violation was abated within the time period established by DMG. The Good
Faith Credit component of this proposed penalty assessment is therefore proposed at $250.
The Total Proposed Civil Penalty Assessment for this NOV is therefore recommended to be $1500.